Thursday, July 29, 2010

"A Questionable Questionnaire"

Recently, we received a questionnaire from the National Republican Congressional Committee. I have no idea why. We are not registered Republicans. We have never sent them money. We have given them no encouragement whatsoever. My wife’s from Chicago. She’s never even seen a Republican.

Perhaps the National Republican Congressional Committee has been following my blog. A while back, I came out as a conservative, though not as a today-type conservative, but as a conservative reminiscent of the conservatives of the eighteenth century. I identify with the historical conservatives’ cautious and deliberative approach to things.

The National Republican Congressional Committee may have confused my enthusiasm for historical conservatives with an enthusiasm for today’s conservatives. There is no connection. Today’s conservatives are different.

As are today’s Republicans.

Richard Nixon was a Republican president in the late nineteen sixties and early seventies, at which point, he resigned, before he was booted out for breaking the law. Prior to that, however, Nixon, exhibited some distinct moderate proclivities, opening up relations with Communist China, and presiding over the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency.

I note these accomplishments not to praise Nixon, but to demonstrate the difference between the Republicans of one generation earlier and the Republicans of today. It’s unlikely I would ever have been a Republican. It’s a certainty that I couldn’t be one today.

And yet, they sent me a questionnaire. Along with an appeal for money.

I am focusing on the Republican questionnaire only because the Republicans sent me one, and the Democrats didn’t. Having not received a Democratic questionnaire, I cannot make any comparisons. I imagine, however, that a Democratic questionnaire would lean as partisanly in a Democratic direction as the Republican questionnaire leans in the Republican direction. A Democratic questionnaire may not lean at all; it may lean more; it may lean less. I couldn’t say for sure, because I’ve never seen one.

My interest, in any case, is in the “leaning.”

Used correctly, the questionnaire process is an evidence-gathering technique, through which researchers gather honest responses to, as best as the researcher can construct them, unbiased questions.

Though packaged as one, the questionnaire distributed by the National Republican Congressional Committee is not really a questionnaire at all. It’s a pep rally on paper. The give-away is the manipulative way in which the questions have been designed.

Consider, choosing randomly, Question One:

Do you believe the Obama Administration and Nancy Pelosi’s soft-on-defence, reckless spending, higher taxes, and expansive Big Government policies are the right leadership for America?

Before I can respond, I need some help understanding the question. When you say, “soft-on-defence”, what exactly do you mean by that?

“Reckless spending”? Define “reckless.”

“Higher taxes.” Remind me. Are the Democrats proposing to raise everyone’s taxes or just the taxes of a small percentage of people who earn more than a certain amount of money?

“Expansive Big Government policies.” This one confuses me. If the Republicans hadn’t opposed the Democrats’ proposal for increased regulation, would “expansive Big Government policies” have even been necessary?

I apologize for my pickiness, but unless I’m clear on the question, I can’t make a reasonable judgment on what’s “the right leadership for America.”

Question Seven:

Should House Republicans fight to curb spending and oppose the Democrats’ wasteful pork projects, like the $30 million for salt marsh harvest mice in Nancy Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco?”

Help me out here. Is it only Democrats who promote “pork projects”, or do both parties do that?

If it’s a common practice, is there any reason for singling out Nancy Pelosi, and her “hometown of San Francisco?”

Also, I’d really like to know more about this “salt marsh harvest mice” situation. Does the money go directly to the mice? If it does, I would definitely be against it. Even if it doesn’t, you know, there are people whose continued unemployment benefits are being threatened, I believe by Republicans. All things being equal, I’d prefer them to get the money than a rodent study project.

I may be confusing things here. “Curbing spending on the unemployed” is nowhere mentioned in the questionnaire.

Question Ten:

Do you believe Nancy Pelosi’s reckless accusations against the CIA have damaged our counter-terrorism capabilities?

It’s hard to believe that anyone other than a terrorist would deliberately want to damage our “counter-terrorism capabilities.” Does that mean Nancy Pelosi is a terrorist? Of course, my question becomes meaningless if it turns out Pelosi’s “accusations” were not really that “reckless.”

Finally,

Question 12:

Are you against relocating suspected terrorists from Guantanamo Bay prison into the United States?

I’m definitely against it, if they want to “relocate” them in my house. But if it’s in, say, a Maximum Security Prison that nobody has ever broken out of – that would be different.

I guess I just need some clarification.

My point, possibly belabored, is this. Republicans have a right to their positions. And they have a right to raise money in support of those positions. But if they’re trying to win over someone who has an open mind but who finds partisanly-biased fake questionnaires personally offensive, I truly believe they are damaging their cause.

The explanation for such actions, as I’ve written about elsewhere, is that the National Republican Congressional Committee is not talking to me.

9 comments:

Diann
said...

If you find out, please let me know. They have sent two to me. I was appalled by how blatantly manipulative they were - as well as how misleading some of the questions were. They interleaved attacks on current policy (loosely disguised as questions) with questions about theoretical policy so that if the reader wasn't paying close attention, he/she might easily confuse the two.

My parents got one from the Democrats - it was nothing like the Republican one. Very straightforward.

Tomorrow we take up the related matter of push polls. Those are a milder version of your questionnaire, but instead of being aimed at the true believer, they're also designed to goose those who may still be sitting on de fence by positioning and planting thoughts that may not have already been in their heads. Not to quibble but if there were a similar Democratic questionnaire, I believe it wouldn’t so much lean but list to the left.

Yes, I too receive the occasional similar Republican questionnaire, usually from our local N. Dallas representative Pete Sessions. Not that I’ve ever voted for or contributed to Pete Sessions. I assume it’s from a list I got on by once having contributed to/voted for the candidate rather than the party. What on earth must I have been thinking?

On the other hand I do get frequent emails from the left-listing MoveOn.Org like this one earlier this week:

Hi,This Thursday I'm going to Representative Pete Sessions' office to make a really important delivery. I'm going to hand-deliver a list of constituents who've signed the Fight Washington Corruption pledge—saying we need our reps to stand up to corporate influence and fight for the rest of us. Your name isn't on it...yet.We've got 660 people in our district who have already endorsed the new pledge but our goal is to have 1,000 people on it so Rep. Sessions knows how important this is. I'd like to add your name to the list before I go. Can you click here to add your name?

I did click my name on, but where they allow you to add a comment I couldn’t decide whether to type in why bother or fat chance it'll make any difference? Since the appropriate answer is “fat chance,” and the email ends, as always, with:

“Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way.”I assume the motivation is primarily not that much different than the Republican questionnaires?

Did you see your buddy Melinda Henneberger and Eleanor Holmes Norton on the PBS show “To the Contrary” this weekend going toe to toe with a couple of conservative dames over the attributes of Nancy Pelosi? Wonderfully sly when appropriate, and I think a slight physical and attitudinal resemblance to Marilu Henner – which moves her to the top of my dance card.

Tomorrow we take up the related matter of push polls. Those are a milder version of your questionnaire, but instead of being aimed at the true believer, they're also designed to goose those who may still be sitting on de fence by positioning and planting thoughts that may not have already been in their heads. Not to quibble but if there were a similar Democratic questionnaire, I believe it wouldn’t so much lean but list to the left.

Yes, I too receive the occasional similar Republican questionnaire, usually from our local N. Dallas representative Pete Sessions. Not that I’ve ever voted for or contributed to Pete Sessions. I assume it’s from a list I got on by once having contributed to/voted for the candidate rather than the party. What on earth must I have been thinking?

On the other hand I do get frequent emails from the left-listing MoveOn.Org like this one earlier this week:

Hi,This Thursday I'm going to Representative Pete Sessions' office to make a really important delivery. I'm going to hand-deliver a list of constituents who've signed the Fight Washington Corruption pledge—saying we need our reps to stand up to corporate influence and fight for the rest of us. Your name isn't on it...yet.We've got 660 people in our district who have already endorsed the new pledge but our goal is to have 1,000 people on it so Rep. Sessions knows how important this is. I'd like to add your name to the list before I go. Can you click here to add your name?

I did click my name on, but where they allow you to add a comment I couldn’t decide whether to type in why bother or fat chance it'll make any difference? Since the appropriate answer is “fat chance,” and the email ends, as always, with:

“Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way.”I assume the motivation is primarily not that much different than the Republican questionnaires?

Did you see your buddy Melinda Henneberger and Eleanor Holmes Norton on the PBS show “To the Contrary” this weekend going toe to toe with a couple of conservative dames over the attributes of Nancy Pelosi? Wonderfully sly when appropriate, and I think a slight physical and attitudinal resemblance to Marilu Henner – which moves her to the top of my dance card.

OMG! This is like blogstuttering. If you can, please delete the redundancies. It kept asking if I wanted to "navigate away from this page?" and like the Republican poll, it didn't seem to matter what I answered. (Watch, it will probably repeat the offence

I got one of those National Republican Congressional Committee letters years ago and didn't even bother opening it, I shredded it immediately and used it as bedding in my hamster's cage. Withing an hour my hamster got sick and by the next day it had died. Therefore, I can only conclude that National Republican Congressional Committee hates small animals and wishes them to die a painful death.

By the way, whether it's spelled "defence" or "defense"...either way is correct. "Defence" is usually the way it's spelled in Great Britian and since Earl is from Canada, which is a Commonwealth of England, they spell it the way also and is most likely how he learned to spell it. Same as how American's spell "center" and other countries spell it "centre".

Don't shred these...! Instead, answer the questions "Why, yes, I DO want to give the US of A to France" then use the postage paid envelope to send it back. Costs them the price of a stamp, and doesn't hurt the mice.